Laura A. Dickinson* [This essay is available in PDF at this link] Abstract The presidency of Donald Trump revealed weaknesses in the U.S. constitutional structure and its legal rules, weaknesses that had been covered over for most of our history because presidents of all political parties voluntarily obeyed norms of behavior that kept the presidency within the bounds of constitutional democratic governance. Unfortunately, there is no guarantee that such norms have been permanently restored. Thus, scholars, policymakers, and judges must consider now how to protect the rule of law from a rogue president, rather than waiting for the next crisis […]

“Mark” Min Seong Kim* [This essay is available in PDF at this link] Abstract Justified as a national security law, the CHIPS and Science Act (“CHIPS Act”) channels an unprecedented $53 billion federal investment to reshore semiconductor production and reduce dependence on chips manufactured in China. This article documents the unique supply chain risks and institutional history that have led the United States to recognize the semiconductor supply chain as a matter of national security. Despite its success in incentivizing $450 billion in private investment at home, the CHIPS Act inspired retaliation from China and a $380 billion global chip

Francesca Giannoni-Crystal* [This essay is available in PDF at this link] Abstract This paper explores the issue of defending national activities on the Moon—the first celestial body that will be subject to human activities. Concentrated resources, insufficient project coordination, and uncertainties in the international framework make the lunar surface a ripe arena for stakeholder conflicts. While commercial space companies may try to defend their activities with private security forces, governments will likely be called upon to protect lunar activities. This may include actions taken pursuant to the law of internationally wrongful acts; however, because of nature of space law and

Dillon Guthrie* [This essay is available in PDF at this link] Abstract Once dismissed for decades, the topic of unidentified anomalous phenomena (“UAP”), previously labeled as unidentified aerial phenomena and unidentified flying objects (“UFOs”), now attracts the sustained attention of Congress. In the annual U.S. defense and intelligence authorization measure enacted in each of the last four years, lawmakers have included bipartisan provisions tightening oversight of this matter. One Senate-passed UAP bill would even have directed the federal government to exercise eminent domain over any “technologies of unknown origin and biological evidence of non-human intelligence.” Relenting to this pressure, the